There's no identifiable information in your MAC or SSID. So big deal there. If you don't want your packets sniffed, it's easy enough to enable encryption. If you don't want your emails shared with marketers, no one is forcing you to use GMail. No one is forcing you to use Facebook for that matter either. These companies provide a service that's free to you, but in exchange for your privacy. If you don't know that's the deal, you have no one to complain to but yourself.
It's really quite trivial to maintain your privacy on the internet. Use encryption whenever possible, and don't use services from companies who's business model is selling your information. Problem solved.
All I know is that *I* would get nothing out of a marathon. Physically, it seems more damaging than beneficial. Emotionally, I'd feel pretty dumb putting all that effort into something that doesn't do anything for me physically.
Accepting the pain of a workout in order to finish a marathon.
Suffering and possibly permanently damaging your knees and getting nothing in return. Is that maturity?
Working long hours to get a promotion.
And then realizing, your free time was more valuable in the first place.
Laboring in the hot sun to create a beautiful garden.
Well at least that one is a worthy goal.
Re:Was Not Impressed at All
on
Lost Ends
·
· Score: 1
Unlike a finely crafted classic novel, the grand symbolism and allusions are too abstract to nail down.
If the symbolism in a finely crafted classic novel were easy to nail down, it would already be done, and nobody would talk about it anymore. Then it would no longer be a classic. Literature that relies on symbolism is deliberately vague(like Lost) in order to give English majors something to do. We are deliberately taught in English classes that "there is no right answer". Like you said, what's the point?
Video-to-TV box and laptop are configured to OpenDNS. They worked the moment I wired in. Upstairs box, newly rebuilt, started getting Comcrap's "we hijack your traffic" crap-DNS info
You know, I'm usually really strongly against any increase in government power at the expense of civil liberties. I'm having trouble coming up with how this is an infringement on them though. It's not like they're keeping your entire DNA sequence, just information on the frequency of some marker sequences. They won't be able to search your genome for any useful information. The analogy to fingerprinting is apt here:
Once the government gets a hold of your fingerprints:
* You will have no idea what it is used for, by whom, nor how often * You will never really be able to get that data removed * You will be put in a position to have to prove innocence instead of being assumed innocent * You are giving up yet more control over your life and privacy to the government * The data WILL be used to make assumptions about you * Your fingerprint data WILL be unreasonably searched, every time a search is done, and without probable cause * The data WILL be shared with other agencies- state and fed * The data WILL be leaked in one way or another
Except for the last point you raise, this isn't really any worse than fingerprinting. Family members coming under suspicion because of partial matches would be pretty bad. But I think that's an abuse that can be dealt with. Since your closest relatives are unlikely to share more than 50% of your DNA, that should not amount to a finding of probable (>50%) cause. So that's a fairly limited case for abuse. What else makes this worse than fingerprinting?
Good point. Radical Muslims should really be more tolerant of those who do not follow their religion, and are therefore not bound by its rules.
Grow up, boy. When you get to middle-age like me you begin to understand that life is about tolerating and making allowances for others and not letting insignificant bits of crap ruin your day.
We're still talking about the Muslims who get so worked up over a cartoon that they want to kill someone over it, right?
Join the real world, take your head out of your ass and looking around you - if you do that you'll see most Muslims are normal people like you and me just getting on with their day who don't give a toss about insignificant little bigots like you.
Any Muslim who is a normal person like me won't give a shit about any cartoon. Anyone making threats over a cartoon simply needs to learn not to take themselves so seriously.
Um... I believe the current president is considered "in living memory". Yet, all those who screamed that Bush was taking liberties are now strangely silent. It makes me believe that those people were not worried about losing their liberties. They were simply using it as a club to beat the 'R' over the head with.
Yes, Obama is pretty bad. He voted for the patriot act and has continued the practice of warrantless wiretapping. Bush still comes out ahead because he started it. I do wish more attention was paid to how bad Obama is for civil liberties though.
And as for Bush taking liberties away... I could do everything I could do in 2001 that I could do in 2009. Exactly zero of my liberties were taken. For that matter, I don't know of anyone who lost any freedoms whatsoever under Bush.
We lost the freedom to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures. We lost the right to a writ of Habeas Corpus. We lost the right not to be tortured by our own government. Any one of those is a much greater infringement of freedom than what amounts to a tax raise.
Did you not read your link? "The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s". Even Bush didn't try to use those weapons to justify his search for WMDs.
No one claimed that Saddam Hussein wasn't a lying bastard. He was. What he wasn't was a "serious and mounting threat", and he certainly had nothing to do with 9/11.
Corporations can do a lot more than throw you in jail. They can kill you outright. From miners dying due to unenforced safety regulations, to cancer patients with recinded policies, there are many people who would be alive and free today if we had better regulations.
I see where you're coming from though. This is why we've tried to build safeguards (representation, bill of rights, etc) into government. We need the same sort of safeguards built into our economic system as well. Otherwise we're just trading one tyranny for another.
Conspiracies? Did you not hear all the Bush stole the election, Bush=Hitler, Bush=Haliburton, Bush caused 9/11, Bush started the Iraq war to enrich is buddies, and other bullshit conspiracies over the past 10 years?
The difference is that most of those have some basis in fact. Bush was in fact elected in a very undemocratic manner. Bush did in fact expand the power of the government, and restrict indivdual liberties more than any president in living memory. Bush's foreign policy did in fact benefit Haliburton a lot more than it did the US. The 9/11 truthers are bat shit insane, I'll give you that. But there are truthers from all political backgrounds.
I notice that you didn't challenge any of my factual assertions. If making obvious conclusions from well known facts makes me a "left wing nutjob", then so be it.
When Bush was president, left-wing nutjobs were not much better. Are we comparing the worst of the worst of both parties?
When Bush was president, the left-wing nutjobs were right. It's incontrovertible now that Bush lied repeatedly to get us into a completely optional war that has cost us more American lives and more treasure than the 9/11 attacks. No reasonable person could look at the facts and consider Bush to be a better person than, say, Osama Bin Laden.
Vote libertarian, or libertarian-republican (like Ron Paul) if you want real change towards a smaller government
Yeah, because less regulation = smaller government = increased freedom. Like how the lax regulation of the off shore drilling industry has made me more free to enjoy an unspoiled walk on the beaches of the Gulf of Mexico. Now that I think about it, we should totally deregulate the murder industry. Then we'll all be free to kill anyone we want. Freedom is always good, right?
But government IS the oppressor. How else do you explain that I will be fined $950 because I exercised a Pro-Choice decision not to have hospital insurance
Corporations are the oppressor. How else do you explain all the people who simply simply could not choose to have health insurance because no one would take them? How do you explain the people who had health insurance, got sick, and were promptly dropped? How much choice did they have?
So, you're out $950. Big deal. People have lost their lives because of the malfeasance of the health insurance industry. You still have the freedom to complain about it. The dead don't have any freedom at all.
I can see that, if you neglect the time it takes you to grab the mouse, open 2 explorer windows, navigate to the correct directory in each, and find the entry you want to copy, *and* if you're a hunt and peck typist who has never heard of tab completion. Otherwise the CLI is faster.
Even if starting the copy is faster for you through a GUI, the copy itself will finish faster with rsync most of the time. Rsync won't retransfer blocks that already exist, and if you're transferring over a network it will use compression.
Last time I wrote VB, I used ASCII characters. That would make it a command line environment. A VB interpreter is a lot more like a shell interpreter (or perl or what have you) than it is like a GUI.
I agree. If you can't glob, then you're better off with a GUI. Most of the time I find I can glob pretty easily. And if you're copying less than 10 files, it's easy enough to type a few characters and use tab completion. It's not even worth opening a graphical file manager in that case. There are a few use cases for GUIs, but in general the CLI is a better choice.
When I can rattle off half a dozen features one has that the other doesn't, it ceases to be a matter of opinion. rsync is just plain better. It's ok for you to use the GUI if that's what you like, but don't go around saying that it's better.
Slashdot Mirror
There's no identifiable information in your MAC or SSID. So big deal there. If you don't want your packets sniffed, it's easy enough to enable encryption. If you don't want your emails shared with marketers, no one is forcing you to use GMail. No one is forcing you to use Facebook for that matter either. These companies provide a service that's free to you, but in exchange for your privacy. If you don't know that's the deal, you have no one to complain to but yourself.
It's really quite trivial to maintain your privacy on the internet. Use encryption whenever possible, and don't use services from companies who's business model is selling your information. Problem solved.
All I know is that *I* would get nothing out of a marathon. Physically, it seems more damaging than beneficial. Emotionally, I'd feel pretty dumb putting all that effort into something that doesn't do anything for me physically.
Accepting the pain of a workout in order to finish a marathon.
Suffering and possibly permanently damaging your knees and getting nothing in return. Is that maturity?
Working long hours to get a promotion.
And then realizing, your free time was more valuable in the first place.
Laboring in the hot sun to create a beautiful garden.
Well at least that one is a worthy goal.
Unlike a finely crafted classic novel, the grand symbolism and allusions are too abstract to nail down.
If the symbolism in a finely crafted classic novel were easy to nail down, it would already be done, and nobody would talk about it anymore. Then it would no longer be a classic. Literature that relies on symbolism is deliberately vague(like Lost) in order to give English majors something to do. We are deliberately taught in English classes that "there is no right answer". Like you said, what's the point?
That's bigger than any other drive for your XT. That is why it's called the Momentus XT, right?
5/28/2010 - Dupe post on Slashdot.
6/15/2010 - Trupe post on Slashdot.
If "dupe" derives from "duplicate", shouldn't we derive "tripe" from "triplicate"?
Video-to-TV box and laptop are configured to OpenDNS. They worked the moment I wired in. Upstairs box, newly rebuilt, started getting Comcrap's "we hijack your traffic" crap-DNS info
You know OpenDNS redirects NXDOMAIN too.
Do any of those have a d-pad? The real competition for the Pandora is the Dingoo.
You know, I'm usually really strongly against any increase in government power at the expense of civil liberties. I'm having trouble coming up with how this is an infringement on them though. It's not like they're keeping your entire DNA sequence, just information on the frequency of some marker sequences. They won't be able to search your genome for any useful information. The analogy to fingerprinting is apt here:
Once the government gets a hold of your fingerprints:
* You will have no idea what it is used for, by whom, nor how often
* You will never really be able to get that data removed
* You will be put in a position to have to prove innocence instead of being assumed innocent
* You are giving up yet more control over your life and privacy to the government
* The data WILL be used to make assumptions about you
* Your fingerprint data WILL be unreasonably searched, every time a search is done, and without probable cause
* The data WILL be shared with other agencies- state and fed
* The data WILL be leaked in one way or another
Except for the last point you raise, this isn't really any worse than fingerprinting. Family members coming under suspicion because of partial matches would be pretty bad. But I think that's an abuse that can be dealt with. Since your closest relatives are unlikely to share more than 50% of your DNA, that should not amount to a finding of probable (>50%) cause. So that's a fairly limited case for abuse. What else makes this worse than fingerprinting?
Because rodeos are fucking gay.
I find it quite offensive to be called a girl no matter what the context.
That's good to know, Sugartits.
One word... tolerance.
Good point. Radical Muslims should really be more tolerant of those who do not follow their religion, and are therefore not bound by its rules.
Grow up, boy. When you get to middle-age like me you begin to understand that life is about tolerating and making allowances for others and not letting insignificant bits of crap ruin your day.
We're still talking about the Muslims who get so worked up over a cartoon that they want to kill someone over it, right?
Join the real world, take your head out of your ass and looking around you - if you do that you'll see most Muslims are normal people like you and me just getting on with their day who don't give a toss about insignificant little bigots like you.
Any Muslim who is a normal person like me won't give a shit about any cartoon. Anyone making threats over a cartoon simply needs to learn not to take themselves so seriously.
Um... I believe the current president is considered "in living memory". Yet, all those who screamed that Bush was taking liberties are now strangely silent. It makes me believe that those people were not worried about losing their liberties. They were simply using it as a club to beat the 'R' over the head with.
Yes, Obama is pretty bad. He voted for the patriot act and has continued the practice of warrantless wiretapping. Bush still comes out ahead because he started it. I do wish more attention was paid to how bad Obama is for civil liberties though.
And as for Bush taking liberties away... I could do everything I could do in 2001 that I could do in 2009. Exactly zero of my liberties were taken. For that matter, I don't know of anyone who lost any freedoms whatsoever under Bush.
We lost the freedom to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures. We lost the right to a writ of Habeas Corpus. We lost the right not to be tortured by our own government. Any one of those is a much greater infringement of freedom than what amounts to a tax raise.
Did you not read your link? "The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s". Even Bush didn't try to use those weapons to justify his search for WMDs.
No one claimed that Saddam Hussein wasn't a lying bastard. He was. What he wasn't was a "serious and mounting threat", and he certainly had nothing to do with 9/11.
Corporations can do a lot more than throw you in jail. They can kill you outright. From miners dying due to unenforced safety regulations, to cancer patients with recinded policies, there are many people who would be alive and free today if we had better regulations.
I see where you're coming from though. This is why we've tried to build safeguards (representation, bill of rights, etc) into government. We need the same sort of safeguards built into our economic system as well. Otherwise we're just trading one tyranny for another.
I'm sorry, I haven't seen any "incontrovertible facts" indicating that Bush said things that he knew at the time to be false.
Then you simply haven't looked.
No reasonable person could look at that assertion and consider you to be anything but a left-wing nutjob.
Bin Laden: ~3000 innocent civilians killed for political purposes
Bush: 50,000-500,000 innocent civilians killed for political purposes
How partisan do you have to be to be unable to see which one is worse?
Conspiracies? Did you not hear all the Bush stole the election, Bush=Hitler, Bush=Haliburton, Bush caused 9/11, Bush started the Iraq war to enrich is buddies, and other bullshit conspiracies over the past 10 years?
The difference is that most of those have some basis in fact. Bush was in fact elected in a very undemocratic manner. Bush did in fact expand the power of the government, and restrict indivdual liberties more than any president in living memory. Bush's foreign policy did in fact benefit Haliburton a lot more than it did the US. The 9/11 truthers are bat shit insane, I'll give you that. But there are truthers from all political backgrounds.
I notice that you didn't challenge any of my factual assertions. If making obvious conclusions from well known facts makes me a "left wing nutjob", then so be it.
When Bush was president, left-wing nutjobs were not much better. Are we comparing the worst of the worst of both parties?
When Bush was president, the left-wing nutjobs were right. It's incontrovertible now that Bush lied repeatedly to get us into a completely optional war that has cost us more American lives and more treasure than the 9/11 attacks. No reasonable person could look at the facts and consider Bush to be a better person than, say, Osama Bin Laden.
Vote libertarian, or libertarian-republican (like Ron Paul) if you want real change towards a smaller government
Yeah, because less regulation = smaller government = increased freedom. Like how the lax regulation of the off shore drilling industry has made me more free to enjoy an unspoiled walk on the beaches of the Gulf of Mexico. Now that I think about it, we should totally deregulate the murder industry. Then we'll all be free to kill anyone we want. Freedom is always good, right?
But government IS the oppressor. How else do you explain that I will be fined $950 because I exercised a Pro-Choice decision not to have hospital insurance
Corporations are the oppressor. How else do you explain all the people who simply simply could not choose to have health insurance because no one would take them? How do you explain the people who had health insurance, got sick, and were promptly dropped? How much choice did they have?
So, you're out $950. Big deal. People have lost their lives because of the malfeasance of the health insurance industry. You still have the freedom to complain about it. The dead don't have any freedom at all.
I can see that, if you neglect the time it takes you to grab the mouse, open 2 explorer windows, navigate to the correct directory in each, and find the entry you want to copy, *and* if you're a hunt and peck typist who has never heard of tab completion. Otherwise the CLI is faster.
Even if starting the copy is faster for you through a GUI, the copy itself will finish faster with rsync most of the time. Rsync won't retransfer blocks that already exist, and if you're transferring over a network it will use compression.
Last time I wrote VB, I used ASCII characters. That would make it a command line environment. A VB interpreter is a lot more like a shell interpreter (or perl or what have you) than it is like a GUI.
I agree. If you can't glob, then you're better off with a GUI. Most of the time I find I can glob pretty easily. And if you're copying less than 10 files, it's easy enough to type a few characters and use tab completion. It's not even worth opening a graphical file manager in that case. There are a few use cases for GUIs, but in general the CLI is a better choice.
When I can rattle off half a dozen features one has that the other doesn't, it ceases to be a matter of opinion. rsync is just plain better. It's ok for you to use the GUI if that's what you like, but don't go around saying that it's better.